MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600811581 · doi:10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1110

Designing an Audiocast Assignment: A Primary-Literature-Based Approach that Promotes Student Learning of Cell and Molecular Biology through Conversations with Scientist Authors

2016· article· en· W2600811581 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Microbiology and Biology Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Foundation (evidence)Mathematics educationEngineering ethicsUndergraduate researchComputer sciencePsychologyMedical educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We believe that conversations between students and scientist authors that link recently published research to fundamental concepts taught in undergraduate biology courses can serve to engage students and enhance learning. To explore this hypothesis, we designed an assignment in a 2nd year cell and molecular biology course in which students read a scientific article, conduct an interview with the corresponding author of the publication, and then produce an audiocast (or videocast). The audiocast summarizes the paper’s findings and describes how the research advance links back to fundamental concepts discussed in the course and its implications for the field. Feedback from student surveys has been positive and suggests that students felt they developed important analytical skills and a better understanding of the process of science through participation in this assignment. Students enjoyed the interactions with scientists and reported on how their learning from primary literature was enriched by asking questions of the authors. Importantly, the assignment had a very positive influence on student attitudes towards research; this is increasingly important at a time when public involvement in debates about scientific funding cuts is critical. We hope this assignment will be of interest to other instructors that teach undergraduate foundation courses in the life sciences.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it